I believe Tapestry 4's LinkSubmit will do it. On 8/18/05, Mark Stang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Howard, > What is the recommended solution that will submit the form on a link and pass > in an id? > > thanks, > > Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thu 8/18/2005 9:47 AM > To: Tapestry development > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecate the action service > > Use a DirectLink component, and pass the id of the invoice as a > listener parameter. > > On 8/18/05, Jonas Maurus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Howard Lewis Ship <hlship <at> gmail.com> writes: > > > > > > > > I just saw another spat of user problems related to use of the action > > > service. I say "use", not "misuse" because, in my opinion, it can't be > > > used correctly. The clever tricks for maintaining client and server > > > synchronization that have evolved in Tapestry 2.x - 4.0 just aren't > > > possible with the action service. > > > > > > I would very much like to deprecate the action service and the > > > ActionLink component. Who out there is using it and why? > > > > > > > I'm currently using the ActionLink component a lot in all my projects > > together > > with contrib:Table. > > > > The typical use-case looks something like this: > > > > Invoices.html > > [...] > > <td jwcid="viewLinkColumnValue"> > > <a jwcid="view" href="../viewers/InvoiceViewer.html"> > > <span key="list.viewinvoice">details</span> > > </a> > > </td> > > [...] > > > > Invoices.page > > [...] > > <component id="invoiceTable" type="contrib:Table"> > > <binding name="source" value="invoiceList" /> > > <binding name="columns" > > value="literal:id,subject,total,viewLink,editLink" /> > > <binding name="row" value="currentInvoice" /> > > </component> > > > > <component id="view" type="ActionLink"> > > <binding name="listener" value="listener:viewInvoice" /> > > </component> > > [...] > > > > Usually the ActionLink's listener then does something like this (Invoice > > being a > > persistent property of InvoiceViewer): > > public IPage viewInvoice(IRequestCycle cycle) { > > InvoiceViewer iv = (InvoiceViewer)cycle.getPage("viewers/InvoiceViewer"); > > iv.setInvoice(getCurrentInvoice()); > > return iv; > > } > > > > This pattern comes from contrib:Table's documentation. At least, should > > ActionLink be removed, alternatives have to be documented well before we're > > doing it, especially in places like contrib:Table, where the documentation > > makes > > explicit use of this component. > > > > Still, I don't know enough about Tapestry's internals to know if it would > > be a > > good decision, but in any way, if it happens, it should happen now. As I've > > said > > before, it's better to make porting to 4.0 a major pain and support 3.0 a > > little > > bit longer than making big changes between 4.0 and 4.1. > > > > How would you solve the above problem without using ActionLink? > > > > cheers, > > Jonas > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > Howard M. Lewis Ship > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant > Creator, Jakarta Tapestry > Creator, Jakarta HiveMind > > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support > and project work. http://howardlewisship.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >
-- Howard M. Lewis Ship Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator, Jakarta Tapestry Creator, Jakarta HiveMind Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support and project work. http://howardlewisship.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
